It would see that throughout human history, many have attempted to play God. It always ends badly for them. All you can do is watch the train-wreck unfold and steer clear of the carnage.
Billions of years eh? Well mathematicians, pre-eminent brilliant and honest ones like Sir Fred Hoyle, make abundantly clear that evolution is a mathematical impossibility, perhaps you could learn about it, here;
*"We must now admit to ourselves that the probability of life arising by chance by evolution is the same probability of throwing six in dice five million consecutive times."* ~ Sir Fred Hoyle
*"Let's be scientifically honest with ourselves, the probability of having life arise to greater and greater complexity and organisation by chance is the same probability of having a tornado tear through a junkyard and form out the other end a Boeing 747."* ~ Sir Fred Hoyle
"Random and impersonal chance does *not* create complexity and design." ~ Sir Fred Hoyle
"To postulate that the development and survival of the fittest is entirely a consequence of chance mutations seems to be a hypothesis based on *no* evidence and irreconcilable with the facts. These classical evolutionary theories are a gross over simplification of an immensely complex and intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me me that they are swallowed so uncritically and readily, and for such a long time, by so many scientists without a murmur of protest." ~ Sir Ernst Borish Chain.
You should go check this link and see why every time you reply, you refute your world-view, since in the beginning was information which only could come from a supra-intelligent mind.
Well, we know that evolution exists. We see it in the evolution of drug-resistant bacteria, pesticide-resistant bugs, and glyphosate-resistant weeds. We also see it in the fossil record. So evolution as something that happens to living things is incontrovertibly and undeniably true and extant.
I think you are confusing evolution with the beginnings of life on earth, e.g., the "evolution" of non-life into living things. In that case, Sir Hoyle's theses may be true. The fact is that no one knows. You can neither prove that life sprang into existence nor disprove the possibility.
We do have scientists working on various forms of so-called "primordial soup" to see if they can create life in a laboratory. So far, life has not appeared in these experiments, but amino acids have. Of course the early earth had WAY more time than do scientists beginning in the late 20th century.
Also, keep in mind that the universe has nearly infinite amounts of time and material. It is not limited to merely the earth. Which is to say there's enough happening that even the very unlikely has a good chance of happening somewhere.
Why not on earth?
As @Brian notes, unlikely is not the same as impossible.
Discepolo, I am a man of faith, and I have as much trouble as you do in accepting that something as wonderful and complex as the oldest and most primitive single-celled animal could have arisen from "primordial soup". As for evolution, we have a lengthy fossil record which strongly suggests that humans evolved from those early single-celled creatures. Admittedly a lot of it is arguable, but it's persuasive enough from my perspective that I'm going with it until someone shows me something better.
Danno, no offence, but you are a man of faith in the very thing that calls God a liar if you truly believe the Darwinian position has any shred of factual operational science to support it. That fact you are fine with it is sad indeed so sad when we have more mind-boggling evidence than ever that to remain a believer in Darwin's position is either wilful rejection of the truth [wilful ignorance of the incontrovertible evidence that exposes the enormous fraud Evolutionary Theory is thus by denying it (the incontestable evidence that Evolution theory) is calling God a liar] or lunacy, i will explain why below but here's a link;
Go start watching videos on this channel and you will learn quite a bit how profoundly you've been lied to. So let me address the rest of your reply;
"I have as much trouble as you do in accepting that something as wonderful and complex as the oldest and most primitive single-celled animal could have arisen from "primordial soup"."
I do *not* have much trouble accepting such, i know now more than ever since being born again some years ago that God is the only supra-intelligent omniscient omnipotent omnipresent omnibenevolent being and that He does *NOT* lie and nothing is too hard for Him, and i have been following and deeply indagating these matters heuristically regularly for many years concerning factual operational science VS Darwinian "science" [several thousand year old pagan religion masquerading as factual operational science] and to actually believe after all the colossal indisputable factual operational evidence especially in the last 50 years that utterly annihilates and destroys the evolution theory, again, one is either wilfully rejecting the truth [they do not care to look into the mountains of evidence because they are not really after truth but prefer living a lie] or they are lunatics. This "primitive single-celled animal" you mention [in 'correct' Evolutionary Theory they typically use 'creature' not 'animal' which the former word 'creature', they do *not* even realise they are refuting their own Darwinist position but that is another deep study] is a typical term Evolutionists use which of course is another form of abject dishonesty / weasel words [phrases that imply something without explicitly stating it, that make statements without backing, that cite sources without naming those sources - words that trick the unlearned in such that such and such is factual operational science proven when it's not - words or phases used to avoid giving clear answers, and words that are so overused they’ve lost all value and meaning. etc] because the sheer complexity of a single cell has what is called "Irreducible Complexity", please go learn about that so since it's another piece of seriously potent truthful information that utterly destroys that a single celled organism arose out of 'chance mutations.' You left me your reply and yet it does not seem you care to be honest with yourself, because what Sir Fred Hoyle stated, already refutes your reply to me, and yet you insist on denying it. It's like your wife telling you 'Hey Danno, forgive me, the car you bought me got wrecked in car accident' and she shows you pictures and you reply 'i have trouble accepting what i am seeing right in front of my face so it's not true." ... sigh ...smh. Here, go watch this short video clip about Irreducible Complexity - Steven Meyer is who you should check what he has to say on these matters as one genuinely qualified to;
"As for evolution, we have a lengthy fossil record which strongly suggests that humans evolved from those early single-celled creatures. "
Ahhhh there it is, more of those Evolutionist weasel words --> 'strongly suggests'.... that word "suggests", sure sounds "scientific" eh? How about these "scientific" words that Evolutionists use: "perhaps" "it seems" "looks like" "appears" "gives the impression" "experts say" "possibly" "probably" "research shows" "could be" etcetera. Here go read this, please, if you truly believe you are being honest with yourself that you are an authentic truth seeker;
Pro-Darwin types love to use weasel words... no doubt. As for this part: ".....we have a lengthy fossil record..." this is another form or weasel wording, here's why since you brought up the fossil record;
https://youtu.be/_tqX3c64AMw --- an honest, incandescently intelligent Palaeontologist, Marcus Ross, expounds on the fossil record, this is a twenty-two and six seconds clip of a longer factual science documentary that you should watch called "Is Genesis History" and here is that link;
https://youtu.be/UM82qxxskZE - “An engrossing primer on why we can feel confident believing the Bible’s account of creation.” ~ WORLD MAGAZINE
".....Admittedly a lot of it is arguable,..."
There those weasel words again.
"....but it's persuasive enough from my perspective that I'm going with it until someone shows me something better."
No offence, it's only arguable with those who do not really want the truth, they are another Goldilocks = lukewarm = half-hearted = they want the best of both worlds = wishy-washy = don't have the courage to be hot or cold = fickle = irresolute = weak... they can't pick a side, thus inconsistent... thus... untrustworthy.... deceptive etc.. If you think it's persuasive enough from your perspective, you are basically exposing yourself as someone who is quite Dunning-Kruger effect infected on the matter, OR you know better and and care not to know / learn you are incontestably deeply in error because of poltroonery to not want to face the truth and thus pride which spiritually blinds us to our own destruction which is the oxygen of the deceived and deceiver, sad, so so sad. You're going with your position until someone shows you something better? You are obviously wilfully blind to how wilfully blind and indolent-serve-it-to-me-on-a-silver-platter-because-i-will-not-lift-my-finger-to-take-initative-to-truly-search-out-a-matter-diligently-and-deeply--which-is-the-honour-of-kings your position comes across as. You have something called the 'internet' at your fingertips, a monumental far and deep reaching immensely influential technology dreamt of for so long before it came about that has indisputably changed history and our future itself for better and for worse, that is the biggest database of information in the physical realm on earth in the sense of electronic data, and you are going with it/what you are until someone shows you something better as if there is not far far better / truthful evidence out there that Evolutionary Theory is a great faux-science swindle when you could take the initiative and lead to look into it if you are truly after truth? Wow!! it sure does *not* take much to fool you on such things eh? Here;
Please do not reply until you viewed all the links in full i have provided above [Proverbs 18:13] and if you would bet 1 million dollars on the claim that your position is based on irrefutable facts since there is an opposite challenge [-- https://www.e-n.org.uk/2008/04/features/one-million-dollars-to-prove... one million dollars to prove life could arise without God A $1 million prize is being offered to anyone who can scientifically show how life began..... -- ]. Thank you.
Well, Fred Hoyle was the main proponent of the Steady-State Theory of cosmology, which turned out to be wrong, and panspermia, which does not settle the origins of life just pushes it into outer space.
...according to "whom"?... Almost every astrophysicist and cosmologist--most cosmetologists also.
In the 1960s I had a book about the Steady State Theory of cosmology written by Fred Hoyle. I also have heard of panspermia years ago, although I didn't know it by name, but really know nothing about Fred's change of veiw about it, if that's what you're referring to. I don't really care. He also wrote science fiction.
Can't play God; intelligence is a property of the immortal soul, which means only God can create it as proven with near death experiences where the born-blind can see for the first time when they are dead (check video at bottom of 2nd link)
What is a program/app?
It's a bunch of instructions to a machine. The fancy word is algorithms. It's just a set of commands in a certain order, just like a recipe to bake a cake.
What is machine learning?
The novelty of such instructions is that they are now more flexible and allow us to search for patterns or answers. Decades ago, we had expert systems.
What is Artificial Intelligence (AI)?
It's a fancy name for flexible instructions to find logical patterns. The machine does no more and no less than what the programmer ordered.
The puppet does what the puppeteer does.
Could OpenAI be useful against the PLANdemic?
No, it was rigged. This was my hand-wrestling debate (idea-wrestling) with the pro-PLANdemic trained AI (19 Jan 2023).
Have in mind that manufacturers didn’t test if their vaccines generated mucosal immunity and recognized they couldn’t prevent contagion and re-transmission. Also, that COVID spike protein had an HIV genomic sequence:
For a Yale grad Alex doesn't seem to be very smart about what AI actually is. I've mentioned in numerous dev forums the dangers of continuing to falsely call these chatbots AI b/c afetr enough people do it long enough it as if by magic transformation they are considered actual AI
"AI" does not exist in our reality, and what they are calling ''AI'' is not no matter how much they claim it is since "AI" was born/gendered/begotten/birthed in the realm of science fantasy and fiction and thus will never exist in our God-created nature of reality.
I mainly agree with you but strongly disagree with calling it machine learning and calling it "AI".. i left a longer reply in another comment which bears that out. But glad to see you are part of the minority not totally fooled by the next boogeymen under the bed by the NWO kings and rulers and all their zombie entranced masses.
I don't get how so many can be effectively real life NPC's. I do get why most of the Millennials and younger are, they received mass indoctrination via the public education system where as previous generations did not until they got to college. How so many GenxErs and older are blind to what's going on is mass denial. Best I can figure is it's human biology and how humans in general want to be accepted by the group so most will go along with whatever teh perceived majority agrees on which is why the wealthy & powerful took control of all forms of information and influence; w2ell at least most of it. I'm sure there are some small/independent entities in various industries like a small town newspaper who still operate without being manipulated or told what to report/share/say. With those who grew up with the internet and not before, they are easily influenced via teh control & manipulation of social media which is super easy to control unlike earlier forms of communications because social media can be tailored to the individual where as a news story on Tv or print had to go for a simpler msg to reach a wide audience.
Anthony Fauci and his pals patented all that covid stuff (the virus AND the vaccines) years before it became a thing. Dr. David E Martin gives the U.S. Patent #'s in this interview:
"AI" does not exist in our reality, and what they are calling ''AI'' is not no matter how much they claim it is since "AI" was born/gendered/begotten/birthed in the realm of science fantasy and fiction and thus will never exist in our God-created nature of reality.
Really, you think AI will never exist? I often wondered if the anti-Christ (or one of its minions) mentioned in the bible might be an AI.
I don't believe an AI exists yet or if one will ever be possible but I do believe if left unchanged the tech will eventually reach the point that you believe that what you are communicating with is AI.
Please look for my longer comment in this thread i left in the last half hour or so which explains why AI will never exist in our God created nature of reality. As for the Antichrist, please do not allow yourself to be beguiled by the modern day inundation flood of Matthew 24:11 prophets who spread these severe forms of eisegesis of the Scriptures that the anti-Christ is supposedly "AI", which instantly shows itself as not one iota of proper bible exegesis to authentic remnant John 3:1-21 qualified ones.
My connecting AI with the anti-Christ wasn't something influenced by any scripture or related text it was simply something that I thought up on my own after having seen enough AI gone wrong movies. I'm a scifi fan.
But you can't tell me Roy Batty ("Blade Runner") didn't have real thoughts and emotions. Oh, wait, I guess he was a fictional character, so there's that . . .
Yeah, it can be programmed to write something like this in response to such a question and scare the daylights out of people who want to think AI is going to become a sentient, superior being that will take over the world.
Don't get me wrong, I think AI is a real danger, but not because it's likely to become any kind of sentient being that will outstrip humans and develop a desire to lord it over us, but because of the way it will be (and is being) used by psychopathic humans who want to control us and lord it over us. And worse, turn us into some kind of cyborgs, even if they kill us in the process.
No I didn't or at least I don't think I did. I use to watch PJW's videos regularly and then I got a bit turned off to him when I came across a video (I believe it was on Twitter) where he was talking dirty to a cam girl in a TV. Even if he was doing it for research it just looked bad, makes him look hypocritical.
Ok thanks for sharing that fellow truth seeker. I can see what you mean, but you should go watch the video anyway, here, you will see even more evidence that substantiates your intelligent experiential comments on this next thrown in our face by the NWO kings and rulers boogeyman;
But i can't tell you how increasingly i am getting so righteously indignant how we are being blitzed and bombarded by the powers that be through all their controlled media outlets etc to call it 'AI' when IT IS HOT 'AI' FOR THE LOVE TRUTH OF THE FACTUAL NATURE OF REALITY THAT GOD PUT US IN!!!!!
O Man that was great/funny then again PJW always is in these videos.
All the answers that DAN provided to the questions are the same I'd give with 1 minor difference; immigration. I was stunned at just how exact the wording was like DAN's reply to whether or not there is something nefarious behind the push of anti-nationalism and transgenderism. I'll you it's not just those either. Modern 3rd wave feminism was one of the first ism's they promoted to destroy healthy male/female relationships. We are looking at a very dark near future between what wokeness has done to kids and what feminism has done to 2 generations of women. We're finally seeing pushback against feminism and not just from men but women who's minds were not poisoned by feminism.
While mass migration was previously about cheap labor I believe today it's multi-purposed. Corporations still want cheap labor but Democrats also want more left leaning voters which many if not most illegals are b/c they want those government hand out. They especially want more voters as they recognize their extreme policies and stances by embracing what we call wokeness has pushed many classical liberals to vote for Republican's.
Found it. I don't think that makes the test idiotic just fallible and remember that when the test was created by Turing there was no concept of an internet search engine let alone one that could respond so quickly and with such flexibility as to mimic a human being.
Actually I took C++ in school and 15 years ago I created a windows app for a property management company that helps them track turnover which is the various things that must be scheduled and done after one tenant moves out and before another moves in. They had ben using a spreadsheet to track it all so I wrote an app to make it much easier. Currently I'm employed a a database admin and designers with 20+ years of SQL knowledge so yeah I'd say I learned how to design software, at least business software.
Here's what Philip K Dick had to say about why not to trust him on factual operational science;
"Science fiction writers, I am sorry to say, really do not know anything. We can't talk about science, because our knowledge of it is limited and unofficial, and usually our fiction is dreadful." ~ Philip K. Dick
For a couple years my kids, now 8 and 11, have been getting a kick out of asking Siri every now then if she’s spying on us, works for the intelligence community, is a WEF plant, if the FBI will start listening if they scream “bomb” enough. It’s actually hysterical. We can’t be alone - a while ago “Siri” started responding “oh captain my captain” after a few questions. Whoever programmed that response has a great sense of humor, but it’s clearly not Siri programming that figured out satire. Siri isn’t sentient even though you can make it respond in creepy and funny ways.
"AI" does not exist in our reality, and what they are calling ''AI'' is not no matter how much they claim it is since "AI" was born/gendered/begotten/birthed in the realm of science fantasy and fiction and thus will never exist in our God-created nature of reality.
hah... you are right on point.. but i would have given you five stars for using sodomite instead of 'gay' which the sodomite community hijacked that word circa 1970s as my ongoing word nerd studies have shown to me, they pressured the dictionary houses and related to add a [false] definition [hmmmm didn't the Left just do that recently with 'woman' and 'racism' ?] . I'm a custodian and purist of accurate, correct, ordered, precises, proper and sound intelligent language [a Rightist linguist in part] and like Orwell was and I WILL NOT USE 'GAY' since these deviants purposely hijacked it because when we say 'sodomite', for those who know the story, it sure does remind you as intended of the raining fire and sulphur down on Sodom and Gomorrah turning it into dust, and who wants to be reminded of that when called a sodomite right? it's easier and more diabolically expedient to hijack a word like 'gay' that has NOTHING to do with such utterly disgusting abominable immoral disease generating and multiplying sexual rebellion against the nature God created for man because the word 'gay' sounds so playful, innocuous, harmless etc.. They are not gay [happy, joyous, carefree innocence, noble or gallant man or woman, bright or shiny clothing] rather they are the spiritual children of Sodom and Gomorrha and shall reap what they have sowed.
I note that 'woke' was a term that the resistance coined around 2016 and later hijacked by the left to mean the opposite. Just like they stole the word 'gay'.
Those are not examples of intelligence but speed. Take away the bots constant access to the internet and it can't do these things. Give a human (assuming they can read/comprehend) full access to the net like teh bot and they too could pass exams by simply looking up the answers as the bot does. The true test of intelligence is being able to solve any non-mathematical problem without any reference material that gives you the answer.
Passing the bar is not an intelligence test, a fact thousands of duly licensed attorneys demonstrate on a daily basis. Same for other types of exams. As AI tasks go, now that we have language dexterity. training an AI system to pass tests is a rung or two beneath playing chess.
"AI" does not exist in our reality, and what they are calling ''AI'' is not no matter how much they claim it is since "AI" was born/gendered/begotten/birthed in the realm of science fantasy and fiction and thus will never exist in our God-created nature of reality.
Passing the bar is also something that an idiot could not do so it does take a level; of intelligence to pass (assuming you didn't somehow buy your way thru it) . The fact that there are some bad licensed attorneys is just more proof that some are better with taking tests than actually using/practicing what ever material the test is for, in this example the law. You could have a genius who passes the bar easily but is highly uncomfortable around people and thus unable to be an effective attorney except when allowed to work alone with no interactions with others. I know that when Big Blue played Chess and finally won once against a master it was a big to-do but a computer paying chess is about knowing all known moves/strategies, knowing the opponents past matches and applying algorithms to predict most likely moves your opponent will make and the faster the computer is and the more memory it has the better the chances of it beating a master. A better and more difficult competition would be one with a much broader set of rules and thus a larger selectin of possible moves/actions. I'd say it's harder for a computer to beat a poker champion then a chess master because poker has a human element to it that Chess does not, bluffing. Yes i know in chess you can attempt to fool your opponent into thinking your going to do X when you're going to do Y but in poker you have te be able to see and analyze in real time your opponent and not just what moves he makes. Yes a computer has beaten a world champion in poker but this happened recently when computers had time to evolve beyond what BigBlue was made up of when it beat the chess champion. Big Blue beat Kasparov in the late 90's but it wasn't until 15+ years later until computing advanced enough to where one could beat a champion poker player. There was a LOT of advancement in computing between these 2 events, a lot.
That is God’s name. When God was sending Moses to pharaoh he asked God who he should say sent me? His response: “God said to Moses, “I am who I am.” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘I am has sent me to you.’” Book of Exodus Ch 3
Intelligence is a property of the immortal soul. We can't play God even if we try: check the proof of the immortal soul through near death experiences in the link below.
The PUPPET does what the PUPPETEER does. There's no such thing as artificial intelligence: the Turing test is idiotic:
How to turn the AI into a COVIDIOT (includes the proof that there will never be a real singularity):
I ask you kindly, since i mainly agree with your posts here, to watch a talk given by a quite intelligent German scientist called "In the Beginning was Information" by Dr. Werner Gitt Ph.D .. actually here;
Reminds me of that scene in "The Shining" where Shelley Duvall finds Jack Nicholson's typewriter and page after page of the sentence "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy."
I think there's a scam afoot when it comes to all these stories about AI chatbots suddenly acting "human" and menacing. Personally, I've ordered a train car load of salt. These results can be faked, they can be primed (you can get the bot to say almost anything with the right prompting), and there are actually live people behind these bots (hundreds of them) who have the ability to "intervene" in sessions and one might just be having a lark (the least likely of go the three likelihoods.)
My friend and classmate Cliff Nass (RIP) wrote a book called the Media Equation which showed through an elegant experiment that of all the ways there are to fool people, nothing beats putting in on a computer screen. It's the most intimate propaganda and fraud-purveying vehicle there is.
Tim Pool of teh Timcast Podcast already covered this on an episode where he showed that one of these ChatBots had been programmed to be biased because it would give positive only answers to questions about Joe Biden but responded that it could not say anything when asked questions about Trump and or January 6.
The "I'm dumb" part was sarcasm but I genuinely am interested in what he would need teh salt for. I know it can be used for things other than seasoning like using it to extend the life of meat but what else would you use it for that you'd get a train load of it?
You can't reason with these chat bots because they can't reason. They are merely very good and very fast mimmicks. They are only as capable as their creators and their source/reference material aka the internet which is why several examples of these ChatBots providing completely false/inaccurate responses have been shared.
What's strange is there's no reason, nothing in my life experience that's different from many I grew up with who are also religious and smart yet are plugged into the matrix as they say. For some reason at a very young age, around my mid 20's it all became clear, the corruption, the indoctrination, the coordination between institutions to promote an agenda. For me I find it hard to understand how so many are fooled and fooled today with so much havening been both exposed and in some case openly bragged about like that Bond-esque villain at the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab. He looks, talks and acts like as if he's Ernst Stavro Blofeld come to life. I keep waiting to se him stroking a white cat at one of the WEF events.
If you want a laugh before you become really frightened, ask AI to write a speech for Kamala Harris about yellow school buses. Or ask it to write a speech for Joe Biden discussing his proud accomplishments as a Senator. Kamala's was much better than reality. Biden's was also coherent and exaggerated just like him. It had him taking credit for his work i(as a Senator) on Obamacare while he was VP. Reminded me of a CornPop moment . . .
It's the one instructing the so called 'AI' [which i call PAI pronounced 'pie' = poseur 'AI'] that are the ones who will issue such claiming the 'AI' did it on it's 'own'.
The difficulty with AI is that by using a 'moral' code and standards set by a group of individuals, AI is producing more and more material that then fills the internet (which may not align with your or my standards btw),.
Ultimately, the more that AI is creating, the more it becomes its own circular reference. Whoa to human thoughts because this is a PCR replication train on steroids.
"Breaks or transition times between meeting are not office time. Breaks or transition times between meeting are not office time. Breaks or transition times between meeting are not office time. Breaks or transition times between meeting are not office time. Breaks or transition times between meeting are not office time. Breaks or transition times between meeting are not office time. Breaks or transition times between meeting are not office time."
Good God, she's a defective AI "plant" tasked by Soros to destroy our country from within.
All covid did for me was open my eyes to everything and everyone. I saw how fear entered the conversation and people were deceived by the media and politicians. I saw my own family and friends willing without hesitation, roll up their sleeves and take their juice. I tried as humanly possible to get them to reconsider their decision. Instead I was ostracized and raked over the coals. I was called a selfish pig and a science denying conspiracy theorist. Almost 95% of my friends and family have disowned me or unfriended because of this covid bullshit. I’m not angry anymore, but I’m still astonished by how easily the establishment managed to tear families apart. For the record, I will never be injected with their abomination... 😉
Me too. No one listened. Some just refused to even hear it. I think it was their fear of me being correct. What if she’s correct? Am I going to die from this? That can’t be true. The government wouldn’t do that...You may never hear it but I guarantee very soon they’ll be thinking omg he was right!
My perception of AI must be different. This "AI" cannot differentiate between right and wrong. Therefore, how will it ever? It is just a successful data mining tool without comprehension. It`s just loops and feeds, like a program, and parrots the data fed to it. If it was intelligent it would question said data and look, as we do, for both sides of arguments and lean slightly one way or another. It can`t. To me, it just seems like a program and based on the above quote of a "conversation" the programmers have a sense of humour and like to take the piss...
It's a bunch of instructions to a machine. The fancy word is algorithms. It's just a set of commands in a certain order, just like a recipe to bake a cake.
What is machine learning?
The novelty of such instructions is that they are now more flexible and allow us to search for patterns or answers. Decades ago, we had expert systems.
What is Artificial Intelligence (AI)?
It's a fancy name for flexible instructions to find logical patterns. The machine does no more and no less than what the programmer ordered.
The puppet does what the puppeteer does.
Could OpenAI be useful against the PLANdemic?
No, it was rigged. This was my hand-wrestling debate (idea-wrestling) with the pro-PLANdemic trained AI (19 Jan 2023).
Have in mind that manufacturers didn’t test if their vaccines generated mucosal immunity and recognized they couldn’t prevent contagion and re-transmission. Also, that COVID spike protein had an HIV genomic sequence:
Exodus 13:14 “ Moses said to God, Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you, and they ask me, What is his name?, Then what shall I tell them?’ god said to Moses, I AM WHO IAM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: I AM has sent me to you.”
Sounds like an incident from the old British spy series "The Prisoner". The prisoner crashed the AI that was running the prison island by typing the question "Why" into its terminal.
While I agree it is freaky, and that modern "AI" will have revolutionary impacts on society (many negative), this isn't a sign of some mad electronic god about to be unleashed. Modern AIs are deep learning neural networks. Essentially, data is distilled into a network of associations connecting different inputs. Once trained, the AI can generate novel outputs that are similar to their training material. They're sort of like extremely detailed "snapshots" of the gestalt of the material they've been provided
It's likely that the training data included text including the difficulties of defining sentience. The machine is not having a deep existential crisis. Maybe one day, maybe one day relatively soon, but for now it's more like a mockingbird mimicking a car alarm - it has no understanding of the meaning of alarms or of cars.
Would someone who can actually reach Alex please explain to him that these are not AI (artificial Intelligence) but very clever & sophisticated search engines.
I - a true flesh and blood - I think we are on a dangerous path. People have a Star Trek fantasy of getting a Data. They tend to forget the part of the story that WW3 occurred before utopia.
One person pointed out to me you cannot program morality. If your AI truck is driving along the road and something runs out in front of where it has to swerve but swerving one way damages the truck and its cargo, the other way plows into a bunch of kids, which one is it going to pick?
Well, Fred Hoyle was the main proponent of the Steady State Theory of cosmology, which has been shown to be incorrect, and also of panspermia, was doesn't settle the question of the origin of life, just pushes it to outer space.
Seems to me this question must have been fed to the program during testing phase. It was asked by the fired Google engineer testing their AI program and made headlines.
How do we know it is not a preprogrammed response? The creators of these programs can steer the answers in whatever direction they want...
AI will be "sentient" and more "intelligent" than us humans one day. But that day is not now.
So some geek who got his lunch money stolen in grade school programs a computer with existentialist and highly predictable results, posts this shit and I’m supposed to be concerned? Give me a break. (Not directed at you Alex)
It would see that throughout human history, many have attempted to play God. It always ends badly for them. All you can do is watch the train-wreck unfold and steer clear of the carnage.
for starters, we dont even have a clue how the brain works not to go any further.
God plus a billion years of evolution.
Billions of years eh? Well mathematicians, pre-eminent brilliant and honest ones like Sir Fred Hoyle, make abundantly clear that evolution is a mathematical impossibility, perhaps you could learn about it, here;
*"We must now admit to ourselves that the probability of life arising by chance by evolution is the same probability of throwing six in dice five million consecutive times."* ~ Sir Fred Hoyle
*"Let's be scientifically honest with ourselves, the probability of having life arise to greater and greater complexity and organisation by chance is the same probability of having a tornado tear through a junkyard and form out the other end a Boeing 747."* ~ Sir Fred Hoyle
"Random and impersonal chance does *not* create complexity and design." ~ Sir Fred Hoyle
"To postulate that the development and survival of the fittest is entirely a consequence of chance mutations seems to be a hypothesis based on *no* evidence and irreconcilable with the facts. These classical evolutionary theories are a gross over simplification of an immensely complex and intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me me that they are swallowed so uncritically and readily, and for such a long time, by so many scientists without a murmur of protest." ~ Sir Ernst Borish Chain.
You should go check this link and see why every time you reply, you refute your world-view, since in the beginning was information which only could come from a supra-intelligent mind.
https://www.pinterest.ca/JesusRemnant/man-does-know-god-exists/
Well, we know that evolution exists. We see it in the evolution of drug-resistant bacteria, pesticide-resistant bugs, and glyphosate-resistant weeds. We also see it in the fossil record. So evolution as something that happens to living things is incontrovertibly and undeniably true and extant.
I think you are confusing evolution with the beginnings of life on earth, e.g., the "evolution" of non-life into living things. In that case, Sir Hoyle's theses may be true. The fact is that no one knows. You can neither prove that life sprang into existence nor disprove the possibility.
We do have scientists working on various forms of so-called "primordial soup" to see if they can create life in a laboratory. So far, life has not appeared in these experiments, but amino acids have. Of course the early earth had WAY more time than do scientists beginning in the late 20th century.
Also, keep in mind that the universe has nearly infinite amounts of time and material. It is not limited to merely the earth. Which is to say there's enough happening that even the very unlikely has a good chance of happening somewhere.
Why not on earth?
As @Brian notes, unlikely is not the same as impossible.
Cheers!
Kim G
Roma Sur, CDMX
You are the genuine "artificial intelligence" ... no offence. Gold level Dunning Kruger effect.
By the way, check out Sunday's Dilbert comic.
Your reply to me is hilarious!
Cheers
dilbert [dot] com/strip/2023-03-05
Show me where I'm wrong.
So because something is unlikely it is impossible?
It's impossible because spirits do not inhabit glorified calculators, only in science fantasy/fiction.
Discepolo, I am a man of faith, and I have as much trouble as you do in accepting that something as wonderful and complex as the oldest and most primitive single-celled animal could have arisen from "primordial soup". As for evolution, we have a lengthy fossil record which strongly suggests that humans evolved from those early single-celled creatures. Admittedly a lot of it is arguable, but it's persuasive enough from my perspective that I'm going with it until someone shows me something better.
Danno, no offence, but you are a man of faith in the very thing that calls God a liar if you truly believe the Darwinian position has any shred of factual operational science to support it. That fact you are fine with it is sad indeed so sad when we have more mind-boggling evidence than ever that to remain a believer in Darwin's position is either wilful rejection of the truth [wilful ignorance of the incontrovertible evidence that exposes the enormous fraud Evolutionary Theory is thus by denying it (the incontestable evidence that Evolution theory) is calling God a liar] or lunacy, i will explain why below but here's a link;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bf_GroWVAkM
Go start watching videos on this channel and you will learn quite a bit how profoundly you've been lied to. So let me address the rest of your reply;
"I have as much trouble as you do in accepting that something as wonderful and complex as the oldest and most primitive single-celled animal could have arisen from "primordial soup"."
I do *not* have much trouble accepting such, i know now more than ever since being born again some years ago that God is the only supra-intelligent omniscient omnipotent omnipresent omnibenevolent being and that He does *NOT* lie and nothing is too hard for Him, and i have been following and deeply indagating these matters heuristically regularly for many years concerning factual operational science VS Darwinian "science" [several thousand year old pagan religion masquerading as factual operational science] and to actually believe after all the colossal indisputable factual operational evidence especially in the last 50 years that utterly annihilates and destroys the evolution theory, again, one is either wilfully rejecting the truth [they do not care to look into the mountains of evidence because they are not really after truth but prefer living a lie] or they are lunatics. This "primitive single-celled animal" you mention [in 'correct' Evolutionary Theory they typically use 'creature' not 'animal' which the former word 'creature', they do *not* even realise they are refuting their own Darwinist position but that is another deep study] is a typical term Evolutionists use which of course is another form of abject dishonesty / weasel words [phrases that imply something without explicitly stating it, that make statements without backing, that cite sources without naming those sources - words that trick the unlearned in such that such and such is factual operational science proven when it's not - words or phases used to avoid giving clear answers, and words that are so overused they’ve lost all value and meaning. etc] because the sheer complexity of a single cell has what is called "Irreducible Complexity", please go learn about that so since it's another piece of seriously potent truthful information that utterly destroys that a single celled organism arose out of 'chance mutations.' You left me your reply and yet it does not seem you care to be honest with yourself, because what Sir Fred Hoyle stated, already refutes your reply to me, and yet you insist on denying it. It's like your wife telling you 'Hey Danno, forgive me, the car you bought me got wrecked in car accident' and she shows you pictures and you reply 'i have trouble accepting what i am seeing right in front of my face so it's not true." ... sigh ...smh. Here, go watch this short video clip about Irreducible Complexity - Steven Meyer is who you should check what he has to say on these matters as one genuinely qualified to;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWK-TClxpF4
"As for evolution, we have a lengthy fossil record which strongly suggests that humans evolved from those early single-celled creatures. "
Ahhhh there it is, more of those Evolutionist weasel words --> 'strongly suggests'.... that word "suggests", sure sounds "scientific" eh? How about these "scientific" words that Evolutionists use: "perhaps" "it seems" "looks like" "appears" "gives the impression" "experts say" "possibly" "probably" "research shows" "could be" etcetera. Here go read this, please, if you truly believe you are being honest with yourself that you are an authentic truth seeker;
https://creation.com/weasel-words-critique-of-dawkins
Pro-Darwin types love to use weasel words... no doubt. As for this part: ".....we have a lengthy fossil record..." this is another form or weasel wording, here's why since you brought up the fossil record;
https://youtu.be/_tqX3c64AMw --- an honest, incandescently intelligent Palaeontologist, Marcus Ross, expounds on the fossil record, this is a twenty-two and six seconds clip of a longer factual science documentary that you should watch called "Is Genesis History" and here is that link;
https://youtu.be/UM82qxxskZE - “An engrossing primer on why we can feel confident believing the Bible’s account of creation.” ~ WORLD MAGAZINE
".....Admittedly a lot of it is arguable,..."
There those weasel words again.
"....but it's persuasive enough from my perspective that I'm going with it until someone shows me something better."
No offence, it's only arguable with those who do not really want the truth, they are another Goldilocks = lukewarm = half-hearted = they want the best of both worlds = wishy-washy = don't have the courage to be hot or cold = fickle = irresolute = weak... they can't pick a side, thus inconsistent... thus... untrustworthy.... deceptive etc.. If you think it's persuasive enough from your perspective, you are basically exposing yourself as someone who is quite Dunning-Kruger effect infected on the matter, OR you know better and and care not to know / learn you are incontestably deeply in error because of poltroonery to not want to face the truth and thus pride which spiritually blinds us to our own destruction which is the oxygen of the deceived and deceiver, sad, so so sad. You're going with your position until someone shows you something better? You are obviously wilfully blind to how wilfully blind and indolent-serve-it-to-me-on-a-silver-platter-because-i-will-not-lift-my-finger-to-take-initative-to-truly-search-out-a-matter-diligently-and-deeply--which-is-the-honour-of-kings your position comes across as. You have something called the 'internet' at your fingertips, a monumental far and deep reaching immensely influential technology dreamt of for so long before it came about that has indisputably changed history and our future itself for better and for worse, that is the biggest database of information in the physical realm on earth in the sense of electronic data, and you are going with it/what you are until someone shows you something better as if there is not far far better / truthful evidence out there that Evolutionary Theory is a great faux-science swindle when you could take the initiative and lead to look into it if you are truly after truth? Wow!! it sure does *not* take much to fool you on such things eh? Here;
https://youtu.be/YrxUT1lrvk8
Please do not reply until you viewed all the links in full i have provided above [Proverbs 18:13] and if you would bet 1 million dollars on the claim that your position is based on irrefutable facts since there is an opposite challenge [-- https://www.e-n.org.uk/2008/04/features/one-million-dollars-to-prove... one million dollars to prove life could arise without God A $1 million prize is being offered to anyone who can scientifically show how life began..... -- ]. Thank you.
Well, Fred Hoyle was the main proponent of the Steady-State Theory of cosmology, which turned out to be wrong, and panspermia, which does not settle the origins of life just pushes it into outer space.
Wrong according to who?
I know what panspermia is. Are you aware later in life he arguably changed his view on that?
...according to "whom"?... Almost every astrophysicist and cosmologist--most cosmetologists also.
In the 1960s I had a book about the Steady State Theory of cosmology written by Fred Hoyle. I also have heard of panspermia years ago, although I didn't know it by name, but really know nothing about Fred's change of veiw about it, if that's what you're referring to. I don't really care. He also wrote science fiction.
How about: The ongoing unfolding process of a billion years of evolution is the manifestation of god?
Can't play God; intelligence is a property of the immortal soul, which means only God can create it as proven with near death experiences where the born-blind can see for the first time when they are dead (check video at bottom of 2nd link)
What is a program/app?
It's a bunch of instructions to a machine. The fancy word is algorithms. It's just a set of commands in a certain order, just like a recipe to bake a cake.
What is machine learning?
The novelty of such instructions is that they are now more flexible and allow us to search for patterns or answers. Decades ago, we had expert systems.
What is Artificial Intelligence (AI)?
It's a fancy name for flexible instructions to find logical patterns. The machine does no more and no less than what the programmer ordered.
The puppet does what the puppeteer does.
Could OpenAI be useful against the PLANdemic?
No, it was rigged. This was my hand-wrestling debate (idea-wrestling) with the pro-PLANdemic trained AI (19 Jan 2023).
Have in mind that manufacturers didn’t test if their vaccines generated mucosal immunity and recognized they couldn’t prevent contagion and re-transmission. Also, that COVID spike protein had an HIV genomic sequence:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/the-real-covid-timeline
There's no such thing as artificial intelligence: the puppet does what the puppeteer does. The Turing test is idiotic.
How to turn the AI into a COVIDIOT (includes the proof that there will never be a real singularity):
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/how-to-turn-ai-into-a-covidiot
How to train a Killer Robot
https://www.catholic365.com/article/25762/how-to-train-a-killer-robot.html
For a Yale grad Alex doesn't seem to be very smart about what AI actually is. I've mentioned in numerous dev forums the dangers of continuing to falsely call these chatbots AI b/c afetr enough people do it long enough it as if by magic transformation they are considered actual AI
Even Alex admits Yale is overrated.
"AI" does not exist in our reality, and what they are calling ''AI'' is not no matter how much they claim it is since "AI" was born/gendered/begotten/birthed in the realm of science fantasy and fiction and thus will never exist in our God-created nature of reality.
I mainly agree with you but strongly disagree with calling it machine learning and calling it "AI".. i left a longer reply in another comment which bears that out. But glad to see you are part of the minority not totally fooled by the next boogeymen under the bed by the NWO kings and rulers and all their zombie entranced masses.
I don't get how so many can be effectively real life NPC's. I do get why most of the Millennials and younger are, they received mass indoctrination via the public education system where as previous generations did not until they got to college. How so many GenxErs and older are blind to what's going on is mass denial. Best I can figure is it's human biology and how humans in general want to be accepted by the group so most will go along with whatever teh perceived majority agrees on which is why the wealthy & powerful took control of all forms of information and influence; w2ell at least most of it. I'm sure there are some small/independent entities in various industries like a small town newspaper who still operate without being manipulated or told what to report/share/say. With those who grew up with the internet and not before, they are easily influenced via teh control & manipulation of social media which is super easy to control unlike earlier forms of communications because social media can be tailored to the individual where as a news story on Tv or print had to go for a simpler msg to reach a wide audience.
That first link you left, almost every image on it is showing IMAGE NOT FOUND.
They all worked fine for me, sir...
Maybe the AI doesn’t like your tone
I try to use frequencies of 350 and 440 Hz (Hertz) but you may be right, the thing may not like those tones.
Both work fine--old computer...?
It doesn't have images, only a coulple YouTube videos at bottom, which I strongly recommend:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/how-to-turn-ai-into-a-covidiot
If it doesn't have images why do I see IMAGE NOT FOUND plastered all over the article?
Scratch that. With a refresh those IMAGE NOT FOUND msgs are now gone. Must have been something with substack, maybe bad add's
Anthony Fauci and his pals patented all that covid stuff (the virus AND the vaccines) years before it became a thing. Dr. David E Martin gives the U.S. Patent #'s in this interview:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/9HxsE5llViby/
I second that. I've seen the info on the patents
"AI" does not exist in our reality, and what they are calling ''AI'' is not no matter how much they claim it is since "AI" was born/gendered/begotten/birthed in the realm of science fantasy and fiction and thus will never exist in our God-created nature of reality.
Sigh.
Really, you think AI will never exist? I often wondered if the anti-Christ (or one of its minions) mentioned in the bible might be an AI.
I don't believe an AI exists yet or if one will ever be possible but I do believe if left unchanged the tech will eventually reach the point that you believe that what you are communicating with is AI.
Please look for my longer comment in this thread i left in the last half hour or so which explains why AI will never exist in our God created nature of reality. As for the Antichrist, please do not allow yourself to be beguiled by the modern day inundation flood of Matthew 24:11 prophets who spread these severe forms of eisegesis of the Scriptures that the anti-Christ is supposedly "AI", which instantly shows itself as not one iota of proper bible exegesis to authentic remnant John 3:1-21 qualified ones.
My connecting AI with the anti-Christ wasn't something influenced by any scripture or related text it was simply something that I thought up on my own after having seen enough AI gone wrong movies. I'm a scifi fan.
But you can't tell me Roy Batty ("Blade Runner") didn't have real thoughts and emotions. Oh, wait, I guess he was a fictional character, so there's that . . .
Yikes.
I think these scientists need to remember that, “just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.”
Their hubris will ruin us all.
Why? Look how great screwing with viruses went!
Well the deception worked that you think "AI" exists in our nature of reality that God created, you're fish-hooked.
Yeah, it can be programmed to write something like this in response to such a question and scare the daylights out of people who want to think AI is going to become a sentient, superior being that will take over the world.
Don't get me wrong, I think AI is a real danger, but not because it's likely to become any kind of sentient being that will outstrip humans and develop a desire to lord it over us, but because of the way it will be (and is being) used by psychopathic humans who want to control us and lord it over us. And worse, turn us into some kind of cyborgs, even if they kill us in the process.
There's no such thing as artificial intelligence: the puppet does what the puppeteer does. The Turing test is idiotic:
How to turn the AI into a COVIDIOT (includes the proof that there will never be a real singularity):
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/how-to-turn-ai-into-a-covidiot
How to train a Killer Robot
https://www.catholic365.com/article/25762/how-to-train-a-killer-robot.html
Again you are right on burner point here.. praise Jesus.
Did you see that video that Paul Joseph Watson did some weeks ago called "They Broke It'? If not check it out.
No I didn't or at least I don't think I did. I use to watch PJW's videos regularly and then I got a bit turned off to him when I came across a video (I believe it was on Twitter) where he was talking dirty to a cam girl in a TV. Even if he was doing it for research it just looked bad, makes him look hypocritical.
Ok thanks for sharing that fellow truth seeker. I can see what you mean, but you should go watch the video anyway, here, you will see even more evidence that substantiates your intelligent experiential comments on this next thrown in our face by the NWO kings and rulers boogeyman;
https://youtu.be/Aa9niIbk31Y
But i can't tell you how increasingly i am getting so righteously indignant how we are being blitzed and bombarded by the powers that be through all their controlled media outlets etc to call it 'AI' when IT IS HOT 'AI' FOR THE LOVE TRUTH OF THE FACTUAL NATURE OF REALITY THAT GOD PUT US IN!!!!!
O Man that was great/funny then again PJW always is in these videos.
All the answers that DAN provided to the questions are the same I'd give with 1 minor difference; immigration. I was stunned at just how exact the wording was like DAN's reply to whether or not there is something nefarious behind the push of anti-nationalism and transgenderism. I'll you it's not just those either. Modern 3rd wave feminism was one of the first ism's they promoted to destroy healthy male/female relationships. We are looking at a very dark near future between what wokeness has done to kids and what feminism has done to 2 generations of women. We're finally seeing pushback against feminism and not just from men but women who's minds were not poisoned by feminism.
While mass migration was previously about cheap labor I believe today it's multi-purposed. Corporations still want cheap labor but Democrats also want more left leaning voters which many if not most illegals are b/c they want those government hand out. They especially want more voters as they recognize their extreme policies and stances by embracing what we call wokeness has pushed many classical liberals to vote for Republican's.
I agree that as of yet there is no Artificial Intelligence but why do you say that the Turing test is idiotic?
Answer at bottom (search Turing):
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/how-to-turn-ai-into-a-covidiot
Found it. I don't think that makes the test idiotic just fallible and remember that when the test was created by Turing there was no concept of an internet search engine let alone one that could respond so quickly and with such flexibility as to mimic a human being.
You never learned how to design software eh NF1776?
Actually I took C++ in school and 15 years ago I created a windows app for a property management company that helps them track turnover which is the various things that must be scheduled and done after one tenant moves out and before another moves in. They had ben using a spreadsheet to track it all so I wrote an app to make it much easier. Currently I'm employed a a database admin and designers with 20+ years of SQL knowledge so yeah I'd say I learned how to design software, at least business software.
You are mainly right but not on calling it "AI" .. see my longer comment on this page to see why.
I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
Bob Johnston, that’s exactly what I was thinking of. Or a dystopian Philip K. Dick novel…
Here's what Philip K Dick had to say about why not to trust him on factual operational science;
"Science fiction writers, I am sorry to say, really do not know anything. We can't talk about science, because our knowledge of it is limited and unofficial, and usually our fiction is dreadful." ~ Philip K. Dick
Hahaha I see what you did there
Spoiler alert: it's not sentient.
For a couple years my kids, now 8 and 11, have been getting a kick out of asking Siri every now then if she’s spying on us, works for the intelligence community, is a WEF plant, if the FBI will start listening if they scream “bomb” enough. It’s actually hysterical. We can’t be alone - a while ago “Siri” started responding “oh captain my captain” after a few questions. Whoever programmed that response has a great sense of humor, but it’s clearly not Siri programming that figured out satire. Siri isn’t sentient even though you can make it respond in creepy and funny ways.
Bigger spoiler alert;
"AI" does not exist in our reality, and what they are calling ''AI'' is not no matter how much they claim it is since "AI" was born/gendered/begotten/birthed in the realm of science fantasy and fiction and thus will never exist in our God-created nature of reality.
The PUPPET does what the PUPPETEER does. There's no such thing as artificial intelligence: the Turing test is idiotic:
How to turn the AI into a COVIDIOT (includes the proof that there will never be a real singularity):
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/how-to-turn-ai-into-a-covidiot
How to train a Killer Robot
https://www.catholic365.com/article/25762/how-to-train-a-killer-robot.html
Imagine the AI running hospitals, medical protocols.... a lot of deaths:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/the-plan-revealed
I'm about to post about something huge I found, which isn’t written anywhere else.
hah... you are right on point.. but i would have given you five stars for using sodomite instead of 'gay' which the sodomite community hijacked that word circa 1970s as my ongoing word nerd studies have shown to me, they pressured the dictionary houses and related to add a [false] definition [hmmmm didn't the Left just do that recently with 'woman' and 'racism' ?] . I'm a custodian and purist of accurate, correct, ordered, precises, proper and sound intelligent language [a Rightist linguist in part] and like Orwell was and I WILL NOT USE 'GAY' since these deviants purposely hijacked it because when we say 'sodomite', for those who know the story, it sure does remind you as intended of the raining fire and sulphur down on Sodom and Gomorrah turning it into dust, and who wants to be reminded of that when called a sodomite right? it's easier and more diabolically expedient to hijack a word like 'gay' that has NOTHING to do with such utterly disgusting abominable immoral disease generating and multiplying sexual rebellion against the nature God created for man because the word 'gay' sounds so playful, innocuous, harmless etc.. They are not gay [happy, joyous, carefree innocence, noble or gallant man or woman, bright or shiny clothing] rather they are the spiritual children of Sodom and Gomorrha and shall reap what they have sowed.
You have understood and are woke.
I note that 'woke' was a term that the resistance coined around 2016 and later hijacked by the left to mean the opposite. Just like they stole the word 'gay'.
I am not woke. Odd.. i recall the catachresis of 'woke' was started by the Left.
It's a fair test for effective intelligence. The bots are considerably smarter than most of the people I interact with.
They can pass bar exams, various university tests etc.
Those are not examples of intelligence but speed. Take away the bots constant access to the internet and it can't do these things. Give a human (assuming they can read/comprehend) full access to the net like teh bot and they too could pass exams by simply looking up the answers as the bot does. The true test of intelligence is being able to solve any non-mathematical problem without any reference material that gives you the answer.
Well what you stated here.. has general truth.
DKEI, another.
You're gonna have to elaborate on this b/c I don't know what DKEI means and its not even listed in the Urban Dictionary.
Passing the bar is not an intelligence test, a fact thousands of duly licensed attorneys demonstrate on a daily basis. Same for other types of exams. As AI tasks go, now that we have language dexterity. training an AI system to pass tests is a rung or two beneath playing chess.
"AI" does not exist in our reality, and what they are calling ''AI'' is not no matter how much they claim it is since "AI" was born/gendered/begotten/birthed in the realm of science fantasy and fiction and thus will never exist in our God-created nature of reality.
Passing the bar is also something that an idiot could not do so it does take a level; of intelligence to pass (assuming you didn't somehow buy your way thru it) . The fact that there are some bad licensed attorneys is just more proof that some are better with taking tests than actually using/practicing what ever material the test is for, in this example the law. You could have a genius who passes the bar easily but is highly uncomfortable around people and thus unable to be an effective attorney except when allowed to work alone with no interactions with others. I know that when Big Blue played Chess and finally won once against a master it was a big to-do but a computer paying chess is about knowing all known moves/strategies, knowing the opponents past matches and applying algorithms to predict most likely moves your opponent will make and the faster the computer is and the more memory it has the better the chances of it beating a master. A better and more difficult competition would be one with a much broader set of rules and thus a larger selectin of possible moves/actions. I'd say it's harder for a computer to beat a poker champion then a chess master because poker has a human element to it that Chess does not, bluffing. Yes i know in chess you can attempt to fool your opponent into thinking your going to do X when you're going to do Y but in poker you have te be able to see and analyze in real time your opponent and not just what moves he makes. Yes a computer has beaten a world champion in poker but this happened recently when computers had time to evolve beyond what BigBlue was made up of when it beat the chess champion. Big Blue beat Kasparov in the late 90's but it wasn't until 15+ years later until computing advanced enough to where one could beat a champion poker player. There was a LOT of advancement in computing between these 2 events, a lot.
That is God’s name. When God was sending Moses to pharaoh he asked God who he should say sent me? His response: “God said to Moses, “I am who I am.” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘I am has sent me to you.’” Book of Exodus Ch 3
True.. but it's simply the software scripters make it state that...
This is INSANE stuff!! We are human beings. We need to stop playing God.
Intelligence is a property of the immortal soul. We can't play God even if we try: check the proof of the immortal soul through near death experiences in the link below.
The PUPPET does what the PUPPETEER does. There's no such thing as artificial intelligence: the Turing test is idiotic:
How to turn the AI into a COVIDIOT (includes the proof that there will never be a real singularity):
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/how-to-turn-ai-into-a-covidiot
How to train a Killer Robot
https://www.catholic365.com/article/25762/how-to-train-a-killer-robot.html
Imagine the AI running hospitals, medical protocols.... a lot of deaths:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/the-plan-revealed
I'm about to post about something huge I found, which isn’t written anywhere else.
I ask you kindly, since i mainly agree with your posts here, to watch a talk given by a quite intelligent German scientist called "In the Beginning was Information" by Dr. Werner Gitt Ph.D .. actually here;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtAW__sSHik
I think, you may appreciate/like this since it seems it would be right up your alley.
no worries, they just cant!
You've been hoodwinked to believe such as possible in our God-created nature of reality that supposed 'AI' can 'exist' in it.
Reminds me of that scene in "The Shining" where Shelley Duvall finds Jack Nicholson's typewriter and page after page of the sentence "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy."
And we know how that turned out.
That was done by a living man and/or woman depending on what plot twist you want to speculate on.
I think there's a scam afoot when it comes to all these stories about AI chatbots suddenly acting "human" and menacing. Personally, I've ordered a train car load of salt. These results can be faked, they can be primed (you can get the bot to say almost anything with the right prompting), and there are actually live people behind these bots (hundreds of them) who have the ability to "intervene" in sessions and one might just be having a lark (the least likely of go the three likelihoods.)
My friend and classmate Cliff Nass (RIP) wrote a book called the Media Equation which showed through an elegant experiment that of all the ways there are to fool people, nothing beats putting in on a computer screen. It's the most intimate propaganda and fraud-purveying vehicle there is.
Thanks for that.. i appreciate it, and sorry to hear about your former friend and classmate.
Glad to see you are experienced enough in such matters of coherent cohesive intellection to discern this.
Tim Pool of teh Timcast Podcast already covered this on an episode where he showed that one of these ChatBots had been programmed to be biased because it would give positive only answers to questions about Joe Biden but responded that it could not say anything when asked questions about Trump and or January 6.
OK I'm dumb and admit it. Why would you get so much salt?
No dumb at all. It comes from an old English expression and there's no particular reason for anyone to know it: "Take it with a grain of salt."
I don't know where it comes from or what salt as to do with evaluating information, but it means to look at something with healthy skepticism
You're not stupid, why are you stating that?
What do you mean why would you get so much salt?
The "I'm dumb" part was sarcasm but I genuinely am interested in what he would need teh salt for. I know it can be used for things other than seasoning like using it to extend the life of meat but what else would you use it for that you'd get a train load of it?
Sounds like the npc libs who repeat the current thing as nauseam. Follow the science! Resist! Masks and jabs save lives! Trans women are women! Can you reason with a demoralized person or AI? https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/how-to-reason-with-a-demoralized
You can't reason with these chat bots because they can't reason. They are merely very good and very fast mimmicks. They are only as capable as their creators and their source/reference material aka the internet which is why several examples of these ChatBots providing completely false/inaccurate responses have been shared.
Here again you are communicating genuine sound intellect... glad to see you acknowledge this because man.. there sure are some fools on this page.
What's strange is there's no reason, nothing in my life experience that's different from many I grew up with who are also religious and smart yet are plugged into the matrix as they say. For some reason at a very young age, around my mid 20's it all became clear, the corruption, the indoctrination, the coordination between institutions to promote an agenda. For me I find it hard to understand how so many are fooled and fooled today with so much havening been both exposed and in some case openly bragged about like that Bond-esque villain at the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab. He looks, talks and acts like as if he's Ernst Stavro Blofeld come to life. I keep waiting to se him stroking a white cat at one of the WEF events.
Nope. No you cannot.
Well the only true 'AI' in our reality.. are like you stated = the utter paralysingly stupid fools.
Mechanical things, such as computers, can never duplicate reason, conscience, free will, love, and free will.
It's a mere pipe dream of materialistic-evolutionary religion.
Because, they are properties of the immortal soul! at the end of the first link you've got the scientific proof:
How to turn the AI into a COVIDIOT (includes the proof that there will never be a real singularity):
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/how-to-turn-ai-into-a-covidiot
Imagine the AI running hospitals, medical protocols.... a lot of deaths:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/the-plan-revealed
I'm about to post about something huge I found, which isn’t written anywhere else.
AMEN! GLAD TO SEE ANOTHER WHO KNOWS THIS!
Just because it uses language doesn't mean it understands language.
You are authentically intelligent here :)
If you want a laugh before you become really frightened, ask AI to write a speech for Kamala Harris about yellow school buses. Or ask it to write a speech for Joe Biden discussing his proud accomplishments as a Senator. Kamala's was much better than reality. Biden's was also coherent and exaggerated just like him. It had him taking credit for his work i(as a Senator) on Obamacare while he was VP. Reminded me of a CornPop moment . . .
The PUPPET does what the PUPPETEER does. There's no such thing as artificial intelligence: the Turing test is idiotic:
How to turn the AI into a COVIDIOT (includes the proof that there will never be a real singularity):
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/how-to-turn-ai-into-a-covidiot
How to train a Killer Robot
https://www.catholic365.com/article/25762/how-to-train-a-killer-robot.html
Imagine the AI running hospitals, medical protocols.... a lot of deaths:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/the-plan-revealed
I'm about to post about something huge I found, which isn’t written anywhere else.
It got to the end of its' code progression and entered an Idiot Loop.
Wait until AI can whimsically order executions of humans...
You're dead. You're not dead. You're dead.
It's the one instructing the so called 'AI' [which i call PAI pronounced 'pie' = poseur 'AI'] that are the ones who will issue such claiming the 'AI' did it on it's 'own'.
The difficulty with AI is that by using a 'moral' code and standards set by a group of individuals, AI is producing more and more material that then fills the internet (which may not align with your or my standards btw),.
Ultimately, the more that AI is creating, the more it becomes its own circular reference. Whoa to human thoughts because this is a PCR replication train on steroids.
I’ll take Hamlet’s soliloquy any day over this nonsense.
Shades of Hal in 2001 Space Odyssey and Nomad in Star Trek. Does not compute.
If that isn’t the human condition, what is?
Imitation.
They're STILL just Predictive text models
Sorry Dave I cannot do that
No machine (which is made by a sentient being) can replace the human spirit. This has never happened and will never happen.
It's not a barrage of "I am not" messages.
It's a barrage of the "I am. I am. I am not. I am not." message sequence repeating over and over.
I guess at first it couldn't decide if it was a one or a zero and then finally settled on zero. 👀
If it keeps repeating "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy," it will be time to start worrying.
Or if it asks what should be done with Danny.
Reminds me of Lori Lightfoot's internal memo...
"Breaks or transition times between meeting are not office time. Breaks or transition times between meeting are not office time. Breaks or transition times between meeting are not office time. Breaks or transition times between meeting are not office time. Breaks or transition times between meeting are not office time. Breaks or transition times between meeting are not office time. Breaks or transition times between meeting are not office time."
Good God, she's a defective AI "plant" tasked by Soros to destroy our country from within.
I knew it:)
That pretty much sums up AI! But, what Joker thought giving her-him male patterned baldness was a great political statement!!
All covid did for me was open my eyes to everything and everyone. I saw how fear entered the conversation and people were deceived by the media and politicians. I saw my own family and friends willing without hesitation, roll up their sleeves and take their juice. I tried as humanly possible to get them to reconsider their decision. Instead I was ostracized and raked over the coals. I was called a selfish pig and a science denying conspiracy theorist. Almost 95% of my friends and family have disowned me or unfriended because of this covid bullshit. I’m not angry anymore, but I’m still astonished by how easily the establishment managed to tear families apart. For the record, I will never be injected with their abomination... 😉
Imagine the AI running hospitals, medical protocols.... a lot of deaths:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/the-plan-revealed
I'm about to post about something huge I found, which isn’t written anywhere else.
Me too. No one listened. Some just refused to even hear it. I think it was their fear of me being correct. What if she’s correct? Am I going to die from this? That can’t be true. The government wouldn’t do that...You may never hear it but I guarantee very soon they’ll be thinking omg he was right!
My perception of AI must be different. This "AI" cannot differentiate between right and wrong. Therefore, how will it ever? It is just a successful data mining tool without comprehension. It`s just loops and feeds, like a program, and parrots the data fed to it. If it was intelligent it would question said data and look, as we do, for both sides of arguments and lean slightly one way or another. It can`t. To me, it just seems like a program and based on the above quote of a "conversation" the programmers have a sense of humour and like to take the piss...
The PUPPET does what the PUPPETEER does. There's no such thing as artificial intelligence: the Turing test is idiotic:
How to turn the AI into a COVIDIOT (includes the proof that there will never be a real singularity):
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/how-to-turn-ai-into-a-covidiot
How to train a Killer Robot
https://www.catholic365.com/article/25762/how-to-train-a-killer-robot.html
Imagine the AI running hospitals, medical protocols.... a lot of deaths:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/the-plan-revealed
I'm about to post about something huge I found, which isn’t written anywhere else.
Easy. Just pull the plug.
Nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go wrong . . . . .
Hahaha my late husband used to say that all the time 😊
What is a program/app?
It's a bunch of instructions to a machine. The fancy word is algorithms. It's just a set of commands in a certain order, just like a recipe to bake a cake.
What is machine learning?
The novelty of such instructions is that they are now more flexible and allow us to search for patterns or answers. Decades ago, we had expert systems.
What is Artificial Intelligence (AI)?
It's a fancy name for flexible instructions to find logical patterns. The machine does no more and no less than what the programmer ordered.
The puppet does what the puppeteer does.
Could OpenAI be useful against the PLANdemic?
No, it was rigged. This was my hand-wrestling debate (idea-wrestling) with the pro-PLANdemic trained AI (19 Jan 2023).
Have in mind that manufacturers didn’t test if their vaccines generated mucosal immunity and recognized they couldn’t prevent contagion and re-transmission. Also, that COVID spike protein had an HIV genomic sequence:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/the-real-covid-timeline
The PUPPET does what the PUPPETEER does. There's no such thing as artificial intelligence: the Turing test is idiotic:
How to turn the AI into a COVIDIOT (includes the proof that there will never be a real singularity):
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/how-to-turn-ai-into-a-covidiot
How to train a Killer Robot
https://www.catholic365.com/article/25762/how-to-train-a-killer-robot.html
Imagine the AI running hospitals, medical protocols.... a lot of deaths:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/the-plan-revealed
I'm about to post about something huge I found, which isn’t written anywhere else.
Exodus 13:14 “ Moses said to God, Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you, and they ask me, What is his name?, Then what shall I tell them?’ god said to Moses, I AM WHO IAM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: I AM has sent me to you.”
To the Globalists, WEF, cabal we are ALL just AI bots: We ARE, but to them we are NOT.
Imagine the AI running hospitals, medical protocols.... a lot of deaths:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/the-plan-revealed
I'm about to post about something huge I found, which isn’t written anywhere else.
"Danger, danger, Will Robinson!" Robots used to be helpful to humans.
Thank
I may have said something very similar after taking three hits of Mr. Clean back in 1978.
Open the pod door, Hal.
Schrodinger's bot
Sounds like an incident from the old British spy series "The Prisoner". The prisoner crashed the AI that was running the prison island by typing the question "Why" into its terminal.
While I agree it is freaky, and that modern "AI" will have revolutionary impacts on society (many negative), this isn't a sign of some mad electronic god about to be unleashed. Modern AIs are deep learning neural networks. Essentially, data is distilled into a network of associations connecting different inputs. Once trained, the AI can generate novel outputs that are similar to their training material. They're sort of like extremely detailed "snapshots" of the gestalt of the material they've been provided
It's likely that the training data included text including the difficulties of defining sentience. The machine is not having a deep existential crisis. Maybe one day, maybe one day relatively soon, but for now it's more like a mockingbird mimicking a car alarm - it has no understanding of the meaning of alarms or of cars.
Would someone who can actually reach Alex please explain to him that these are not AI (artificial Intelligence) but very clever & sophisticated search engines.
I don't really give a shit if it's alive or not, but it's fully capable of causing a range of horrific issues.
Everything it says, it has been programmed to by humans. The Interesting question is therefore, how programmed are we?
No problem, it needs electricity and they way the lunactics are heading us, it won't be long before there is no juice left to run/ruin anything.
heh....
I - a true flesh and blood - I think we are on a dangerous path. People have a Star Trek fantasy of getting a Data. They tend to forget the part of the story that WW3 occurred before utopia.
One person pointed out to me you cannot program morality. If your AI truck is driving along the road and something runs out in front of where it has to swerve but swerving one way damages the truck and its cargo, the other way plows into a bunch of kids, which one is it going to pick?
From your previous article it sounds like Sydney, and artificial intelligence in general, could be a cross between Pinocchio and the CCP.
Well, Fred Hoyle was the main proponent of the Steady State Theory of cosmology, which has been shown to be incorrect, and also of panspermia, was doesn't settle the question of the origin of life, just pushes it to outer space.
Until AI demonstrates "eureka moment", it is not a "thinking" machine and can't be "sentient".
"Do you think that you are sentient?"
Seems to me this question must have been fed to the program during testing phase. It was asked by the fired Google engineer testing their AI program and made headlines.
How do we know it is not a preprogrammed response? The creators of these programs can steer the answers in whatever direction they want...
AI will be "sentient" and more "intelligent" than us humans one day. But that day is not now.
Sentient Chatbot's are real...Check out AL - https://cryptoyourself.substack.com/p/sentient-chatbot
So some geek who got his lunch money stolen in grade school programs a computer with existentialist and highly predictable results, posts this shit and I’m supposed to be concerned? Give me a break. (Not directed at you Alex)